In need of a track plan guru!!! Help!!

[simonk1809]

Hi, firstly have dabbled along the way with both n and oo gauge in the last 30 years since my dad built a layout. Now after a new dcc christmas present I've gone for it and boarded out the loft. I've already changed it at least 3 times and struggling to come up with something that doesn't resemble  a flat board with straights and bends, more realistic flowing.

 

This is where I hope maybe one or more of you are master track planners could help me out? The size is 24' x 6' with 2' width all round. There is a level drop of 3.5" as you can see from pics. The fiddle yard/ sidings are there to stay and the train length as shows 6 carriages, would like to set the scene in the late 50's early 60's.

 

I would appreciate any help at all as it's starting to bug me.

 

 

Edited March 31, 2021 by simonk1809

[Chimer]

I can't get my head around the levels.  It looks as though the baseboard we can see across one end is at the lower level, and the one that is currently missing at the other end will be at the higher level.  Is that correct?  I can see one (very steep - 3.5 inches in 8 feet - 1in 30?) gradient alongside the sidings - is that a corresponding gradient on the other side, along the narrow bit of baseboard?  Is a double track at high level going to continue from the left hand end of the sidings in the first photo round a u-turn and back down the other side of the room, and if not, what happens beyond the sidings?

 

And when you say "the sidings/fiddle yard are there to stay", do you mean the tracks as we see them now, or just the high-level board in that area?  Cos I can imagine doing other things with that area .....

 

It's a very interesting space, I hope we can help! 

[TonyMay]

I wouldn't recommend using set-track points and track spacing on a layout this large.  Better using streamline.

[Zomboid]

What are you trying to achieve in the space?

[simonk1809]

Thanks for coming back to me guys.

 

Chimer, you assume correctly , both ends will be complete with no gaps, one is lower level and higher at the other end. Again yes, 3.5" over 8' which i worked out at 3.5%, locos have no issues but again this may change. The narrow base board along one side will be extended to match the 2' width the same as the other boards. The plan was to have a split level station at one end so upper over the lower level with some town scape, the sidings down one side a country station at the opposite end then maybe an engine depot, goods yard etc to come later.

 

Tony, mmm, looking at the layout I agree with you as regards to the stream line versus Hornby/set track but the only downside is having to fork out for the new points

 

Zomboid, the plan was to have a split level station at one end so upper over the lower level with some town scape, the sidings down one side, a country station at the opposite end then maybe an engine depot, goods yard etc to come later.

Edited March 31, 2021 by simonk1809

[RobinofLoxley]

Pulling a train up 3.5% may be problematic. Depends on the loco. I see you have a 6 coach rake in one picture have you tried to pull that up the gradient? 

 

Have you used any track planning software?

[Zomboid]

One thing I'd point out - your photos seem to imply that you're running trains on the right. In the UK the convention is that trains run on the left on a 2 track railway.

[DCB]

Thre is a serious concept problem here I fear,    The Set-track track spacing is eating up the limited width, its around 60mm agaist streamline track spacing 51mm and the prototype 43mm/44mm.

You simpy dont have enough width for a surface fiddle yard behind the running lines, for DCC you need a dedicated full width area as a Fiddle Yard.   For DC you can go down a level and build the scenic bit over the FY, as you don't need to see which loco is on which train.   Actually you can get a couple of extra roads under te eaves by going down a level.

I think I would set aside part of the area as Non scenic, maybe even board it off separately, and have either the fiddle yard or a spiral down to a lower level Fiddle yard completely off scene.

I can't see any quick fix of much viewing or operating potential in the present layout unless you fancy runnig 60 wagon freghts in which case they would look fantastic, always supposing you can find locos powerful enough to pull them (GR Wrenn were pretty good at it)

[ITG]

Well, it is your railway, but I’d agree with those who favour switching to streamline flexi track. Not only because you’ll get more parallel tracks on (fiddle yards particularly) but perhaps more because there is a real risk that, if proceeding with set track, one day you’ll look at the layout and say “wish I’d done it all in flexitrack”. 
Plus, there’s the question of wiring. With DCC, there seems to be two schools of thought. 1. Wire as dc with an odd dropper/feed to track or 2. Dropper on every individual track piece. If you opt for 1, and then get continuity problems, you will curse. If you opt for 2 with set track, you are multiplying the number of wiring droppers significantly. Then there’s live frog v dead frog points. If using sound, you can find that the tiniest poor contact with rails will interrupt sound, even if the loco keeps moving. Probably more likely to happen with dead frog points at slow speeds?

Re gradients, have you only tested on the gradient itself? What about the transition to and from it? It’s there where traction problems may occur, as a sudden transition from level to 3.5% can lift (some) loco wheels off the rail, thus losing continuity and/or traction. I certainly had this problem on a now scrapped 3% incline, but not with all locos, just some. 
but good luck.....

[Keith Addenbrooke]

22 hours ago, simonk1809 said:

struggling to come up with something that doesn't resemble  a flat board with straights and bends, more realistic flowing.

 

Hi there Simon.  Thank you for sharing the photos - makes it much easier to imagine being in your loft, and to frame the questions better.  Having read the contributions above I’m basically in agreement with the main points being raised.  If I could offer an observation which may or may not be helpful from my own experience over the past ten years, since I also became more active in the hobby again and started a couple of layouts - both of which I enjoyed but neither progressed beyond track on bare boards:

 

1.  My first layout used Setrack.  It was fun to operate (which was my priority) and I very much enjoyed it.  But using Setrack points made it difficult to get away from the rigid look - it was the 22.5 degree curve in the short points that was too sharp to make the layout look realistic or flowing.

 

2.   After seeing Peco Streamline Long Points in my local model shop I decided to relay the layout.  I went from a busy Setrack layout with 16 points to a flowing Streamline layout with just 6 in the same space.  The basic operating scheme was almost the same, and I had just as much fun (I ran the same trains!), but the layout looked and ran much smoother (the Peco Streamline points have a standard 12 degree curve - much gentler).  It didn’t cost as much to relay it as I simplified it.

 

3.  I must admit it was the absence of scenery and a scenic setting that meant the layouts were never quite convincing, and is now something I try and bear in mind when planning my next projects (but that’s another story, as yet unfinished).

 

I don’t know if this helps - my apologies if it just sounds like I’m repeating the chorus of ‘switch to Streamline’ but if you’re at the stage of frustration - which we all go through - my experience taught me that moving to a simpler flowing layout was the way forward.  Quite a long post, sorry - but to test this (for free!) you could download and print off some Streamline point templates from the Peco website and see how they look on the layout.  If I’m guessing right, it could be that tight 22.5 degree turn in just over 6” that may be the problem.  Keith.

[simonk1809]

Good morning, thank you for you replies, It really does help. You've hit the nail on the head as regards to the streamline, looking into this last night and you are all right it will look better in stream line. The gradients, I have been running all of the locos and full length trains up them with no issues apart from the tender driven scotsman when cold struggles a bit and the 0-6-0's struggle a little. Keep the suggestions coming really appreciate them.

[class26]

I would add to the point debate try the new Bullhead Unifrog points,  Yes, they are more expensive but you will never have a stalling loco and the appearance of the bullhead track is far better than what Peco offered before.  If you can, as Keith above says design you plan to use less points you will keep the cost down and maybe the layout will be visually more satisfying due to the more realistic track. I have never regretted making the change

[Harlequin]

Hi Simon,

 

I think the roof needs to be insulated to mitigate the temperature extremes that are normally found in a loft space. That will also save you money on heating/cooling the space. You also need to think about humidity control to prevent condensation on cold surfaces when you are heating the space or have the loft hatch open. Humidity will also affect the layout. For instance, it will make the rails tarnish quicker and need more frequent cleaning.

 

You've got a list of things you want to include but have you actually drawn a plan to see whether they will all fit? 

 

Most people who have built gradients on layouts will tell you that 3.5% is too steep to operate without extra measures - especially for recent models of steam locos. Anywhere that you have tracks running above other tracks for any distance create a whole set of special problems. The electrics and point motors of the upper level can conflict with the lower. Access to the lower tracks is more difficult and so cleaning the track and poking stuck trains is more difficult.

 

To get the flowing track of the real railway, look at real trackplans and understand how they work. To avoid the flat board look, don't build flat boards! Don't fill the width with track, leave room for landscape and think in advance how that landscape will work. Then build the boards to suit.

 

BTW: I suggest not going for bullhead track because that system doesn't yet have the curved points, Ys and slips you'll probably need to compress the things you want into your space. In the 1950s-60s the trackwork was largely unchanged from the Steam era and that commonly made use of slips, which are also very useful for compression, but Bullhead slips are not on the market yet.

 

Edited April 3, 2021 by Harlequin

[Andrew1974]

Hi Simon,

 

If anyone is going to actually help, then I think we need more info (or at least we have to make some assumptions),

 

So far I have:

• 00 gauge,
• 24’ x 6’ space to work with
• 1950’s - 1960’s (although the stock I can see appears to be from mid 1930’s to early 1960’s)
• lots of features (big station, goods yard, engine shed)
• requirement for a fiddle yard
• 6 coach trains
• Avoid the ‘train set look’ (flat boards with straights and bends) 

 

As I don’t know what your likes and dislikes are I thought I would set out what I would do given the same starting point, whilst taking you through why I would do it - feel free to ignore it all or take some of the bits and adapt for your own preferences.

 

Track: if you want to avoid the train set look dump the train set track. Peco Streamline is the way I would go for ease. I love the bullhead track but would ignore for this layout (limited range and expensive) and go for code 75 flat bottom rail (easier to make look good than code 100) using electrofrog points (I find performance is better than insulfrog points).

Baseboard:

Given these are built I would not change too much but I would loose the gradient and have the track on a single level.  In my experience that gradient is just going to lead to frustrations.
 

 

Track plan basics:

I’d start with the two ends and assume each end is going to be a semi circle roughly 2’6” radius - being the largest that can reasonably fit (again tighter radius suggests train set).  If you assume a few inches at each end so the track is not right to the edge of the board then that will leave roughly 18’ feet each side for the straight(ish) bits.

My other overall proviso (because it’s important to me) is reasonably realistic formations, akin to what would typically be seen in the chose period. So for me in say 1960, the key basic one is minimising facing points. 

 

So, what would I do with that space and those self imposed limitations.

 

On one side I would put a fiddle yard, for 6 coach trains experience tells me that I can fit a reasonable fiddle yard in 12’, this would leave 6’ remaining that I would earmark for the engine shed.

 

On the other side I would add the station with related goods yard.

 

I would not try to add in anything else at the risk of it being over cluttered...I want some space for scenery, so the trains are moving from a landscape of some sort, which could be urban, rural or a mixture. I’m thinking a bridge over a river at one of the ends might break up the ‘flat baseboard’ thing a bit.

 

Now I have decided what I want to achieve, I am going to get out a pen and paper and doodle a few ideas to see what I like.  I’ll post what I come up with tomorrow.

 

Andrew

 

 

 

[Andrew1974]

Ok, so slightly later than hoped but here is my first attempt:

 

 

 

I’ve got 10 roads in the fiddle yard, most of which will take a 6 coach train.

 

I’ve also included a turntable with the small engine shed top left, and added in a small pair of private sidings on the other side of the track to the shed just to add a little more operational interest.

 

I’ve only gone for a simple 2 platform secondary station with related goods yard.

 

The yard can be shunted without fouling the mainline. So you could set a couple of trains tail chasing whilst doing a bit of shunting if you wanted.

 

In the space you have you could fit lots more in, but, the more you add the more you risk the train set look. 
 

Anyway, just my ideas, I’m sure others would do it differently and there no right way of doing it, I’d just spend some time working out what you want to achieve first...oh and if you are going to use a loft take some time first to ensure it is going to be some where you want to spend time, make sure it is properly insulated and ventilated.

 

Good luck

 

Andrew 

Edited April 4, 2021 by Andrew1974

[roythebus1]

The answer to curved bullhead points is here: